Re: a simplified Turtle-like profile for JSON-LD

> On Mar 31, 2024, at 9:02 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Some immediate reactions:
> 
> - I think it would be very important to compare it to TriG rather than Turtle. JSON-LD is capable of expressing named graphs and that is important; do you have that as part of your profile? I must admit I always had issues with the way it is handled in JSON-LD.

for now the profile explicitly doesn't support named graphs or the @graph keyword. i've been thinking about the best way to deal with this (including "whether to") and i don't have a good answer yet. i think named graphs will add *at least* 20 more lines of code though (maybe even more, given the difference between "@graph in the topmost Object that only has an optional @context in which case the Object isn't a node even though it would be if @graph wasn't there" (1) and "@graph in a for-sure named/blank node"). :(

i shamefully admit to still (after many years) having a conceptual disconnect on the utility of multiple named graphs in one document that itself has a URI, and reconciling the meaning of "secondary resources" from the URI Generic Syntax [RFC 3986][] with a URI potentially referring to nodes in different graphs in the same resource and also maybe identifying a graph in that resource. i'm not saying that i don't think such utility exists; just that i haven't mapped it yet. regardless, i'm not requesting a treatise on named graphs here. :)

> - Thinking in terms of a "profile" is probably a great idea; we may not want to throw the full JSON-LD away, and it is important that this is compatible with JSON-LD.
> - Maybe it is worth contacting the semantic web community as well. The interesting question is whether those who are used to Turtle would consider this as an alternative to _replace_ turtle, knowing that, as you say, parsing this language is way easier, and it may bind Linked Data developments into the Javascript world easily (and more easily than JSON-LD). Judging for myself, who "grew up" with Turtle, I could never make the mental switch, and I just continue thinking in terms of Turtle when it comes to RDF. This profile may make me think…

the "maybe this could replace Turtle, and just happen to be JSON-LD too" was exactly what i was thinking. although there's a "foot in two worlds" risk similar to JSON-LD's problem of trying to be both idiomatic JSON and RDF.

-mike

(1) if a node in the woods has no in-edges and no out-edges and therefore isn't part of any triple, does it make a graph?

  [RFC 3986]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3986.html#section-3.5

Received on Sunday, 31 March 2024 20:52:12 UTC